Proof of Reincarnation

[Fixed Cross]

Doesn't exist.



Having said that, there are plenty of arguments to be made for the possibility of it. I like this one: why have a law of conservation of energy, and not a law of conservation of meaning?
After all is meaning not an energy-giving phenomenon? Its loss would account for a significant loss in energy.

[iambiguous]

In all honesty, whenever I think of God or religion or reincarnation or purgatory or Heaven or Nirvana....or the "human condition" here on planet Earth or "I" here and now, I try to imagine fitting it all into this:

Light travels at approximately 186,000 miles a second. That is about 6,000,000,000,000 miles a year.

The closest star to us is Alpha Centauri. It is 4.75 light-years away. 28,500,000,000,000 miles.

So, traveling at 186,000 miles a second, it would take us 4.75 years to reach it. The voyager spacecraft [just now exiting our solar system] will take 70,000 years to reach it.

To reach the center of the Milky Way galaxy it would take 100,000 light-years.

Or consider this:

"To get to the closest galaxy to ours, the Canis Major Dwarf, at Voyager's speed, it would take approximately 749,000,000 years to travel the distance of 25,000 light years! If we could travel at the speed of light, it would still take 25,000 years!"
The Andromeda galaxy is 2.537 million light years away.

Or this:

"The universe is about 13.7 billion years old. Light reaching us from the earliest known galaxies has been traveling, therefore, for more than 13 billion years. So one might assume that the radius of the universe is 13.7 billion light-years and that the whole shebang is double that, or 27.4 billion light-years wide."

For all practical purposes, it is beyond the imagination of mere mortals here on planet Earth to grasp just how staggeringly immense the universe is.

Or, as Graeme Edge once intimated: "don't you feel small, it happens to us all"

Well, not counting the Kids or the objectivists of course.

[MagsJ]

For all practical purposes, it is beyond the imagination of mere mortals here on planet Earth to grasp just how staggeringly immense the universe is.

Is it?

[iambiguous]

For all practical purposes, it is beyond the imagination of mere mortals here on planet Earth to grasp just how staggeringly immense the universe is.

Is it?

To the best of my knowledge, yes. How about to the best of your knowledge?

[zinnat]

Take a look at this case which was reported by bbc in 1990--

https://www.reincarnationresearch.com/past-life-or-
reincarnation-scars-birthmarks-defects/

With love
Sanjay

[Karpel Tunnel]

Doesn't exist.



Having said that, there are plenty of arguments to be made for the possibility of it. I like this one: why have a law of conservation of energy, and not a law of conservation of meaning?
After all is meaning not an energy-giving phenomenon? Its loss would account for a significant loss in energy.

There is evidence. At some point there might be enough evidence. IOW there might be enough support for a general acceptance by non-experiencers. There can be rational reasons for experiencers to believe it, which is different from proof (which actually is pretty much restricted things like math and symbolic logic anyway and not even scientific models and conclusions).

I think often things are presented, not that you did it here, as a binary choice between what can be demonstrated to everyone and what is not true. When in fact there are all sorts of phenomena that it may be quite rational to believe in, and also events and things, when one cannot demonstrate it to everyone. Of course if you can't demonstrate it, you can't expect others to just believe you or your group. But there is this odd myth that if you can't demonstrate it to everyone then you yourself are irrational if you believe it. That is demonstrably irrational as a rule.

as far as evidence: the first person to try to approach the issue with any noteriety along Western science lines is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson
and I believe followers continue the research.

Here is someone trying to tighten (make more measurable) the criteria for determining the strength of children's claims of past lives...
https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-stu ... ckers-bio/

[zinnat]

Doesn't exist.



Having said that, there are plenty of arguments to be made for the possibility of it. I like this one: why have a law of conservation of energy, and not a law of conservation of meaning?
After all is meaning not an energy-giving phenomenon? Its loss would account for a significant loss in energy.

There is evidence. At some point there might be enough evidence. IOW there might be enough support for a general acceptance by non-experiencers. There can be rational reasons for experiencers to believe it, which is different from proof (which actually is pretty much restricted things like math and symbolic logic anyway and not even scientific models and conclusions).

I think often things are presented, not that you did it here, as a binary choice between what can be demonstrated to everyone and what is not true. When in fact there are all sorts of phenomena that it may be quite rational to believe in, and also events and things, when one cannot demonstrate it to everyone. Of course if you can't demonstrate it, you can't expect others to just believe you or your group. But there is this odd myth that if you can't demonstrate it to everyone then you yourself are irrational if you believe it. That is demonstrably irrational as a rule.

as far as evidence: the first person to try to approach the issue with any noteriety along Western science lines is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson
and I believe followers continue the research.

Here is someone trying to tighten (make more measurable) the criteria for determining the strength of children's claims of past lives...
https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-stu ... ckers-bio/

KT,
It is not the case that there are no such evidences or cannot be found. The problem lies somewhere else.
I am sorry to say that 99% of the intellctual populace of nowdays is intellectually blind as they have become so much hardwired to dismiss any such claim as soon as they see it. They do not even want to look at it forget about critically analysing.

They all rely on a single premise that as it supppots any religious theory thus it must be untrue and does not deserve any attention.

It is not a particular person or a particular group problem but cuts accross all cast and breeds. During the last three centuries, after the advent of science and followed later by philosophers like Hume, atheism is almost unquestionable
Religion around the world now. If one wants to be seen as a learned person, he/she must criticise all religions otherwise his thinking ability will become questionable.

Have you recently noticed a statement from our beloved subjectivist here at ILP which says-- Buddihism is just one more fucking religion. Now, what that tells you about the mindset of that poster and how unbiased and philosophically inclined he would be. That is whole story.

That is precisely the reason why millions can be wasted on projects like CERN and they found nothing but a dime should not be spent on metaphysical projects. Actually, these so called scientific organizations fear that if something concrete come out from any such research, their shops would be closed. So, they keep the narrative going as per their requirement. And, sadly, people fall fot it too.

With love
Sanjay

[Karpel Tunnel]

KT,
It is not the case that there are no such evidences or cannot be found.

which is why I said there was evidence and presented people who beleived there was. Honestly sometimes I am amazed at what people manage to read into posts.

The problem lies somewhere else.
I am sorry to say that 99% of the intellctual populace of nowdays is intellectually blind as they have become so much hardwired to dismiss any such claim as soon as they see it. They do not even want to look at it forget about critically analysing.

[/quote]Sure, I agree.

As for the rest of the post, in general I agree. But you need to tell this to others rather than me.

[Ierrellus]

Based on life in this flyspeck of existence, an eternity of heaven or hell is immoral because the punishment does not fit the crime nor does the goodness merit the eternal reward. Beyond punishment and reward, reincarnation seems reasonable as an afterlife; however, it could amount to being reborn with a clean slate rather than some purgatory. I'm fond of "The Tibetan Book of the Dead" for its description of the sloughing off of the mortal coil.

[Fixed Cross]

For all practical purposes, it is beyond the imagination of mere mortals here on planet Earth to grasp just how staggeringly immense the universe is.

Is it?

"staggeringly immense" yes.
by itself a reason to live; to behold the staggering immensity. This is what I understand as the root of science. Who cares about eternal or non eternal life - ones place in the universe is solidified forever anyway, by the mere fact of observing the universe so keenly, an eternal imprint on eternity is made. This will never not have happened.

[Fixed Cross]

Take a look at this case which was reported by bbc in 1990--

https://www.reincarnationresearch.com/past-life-or-
reincarnation-scars-birthmarks-defects/

With love
Sanjay

Some scary shit if you think about it.
I believe in re incarnation, but I also am a scientist and I know what we have amounts only to anecdotal evidence.

What we must consider is the impact that a knowledge of reincarnation would have on the world.
Being skeptical by nature I do not presume to know the criteria for karma, I have to figure out what is worth what for myself. Im not sure that the criterial are universal, other than the standard of holding to ones standards - integrity itself.
In which direction we evolve -
well, Truth, in any case. Whatever has manifest consequences is an agency of truth.
The battle of Kurukshetra, the message Vishnu gives Arjuna, is not that we must fight knowing the right causes, but that we fight the sake of expending ourselves in faith of a higher meaning we cant comprehend beforehand. I don't know if I say that quite right, the sentence kind of took its own turn.
Courage and willingness to self-sacrifice are broadly carried religious virtues, the Gods are reputed to reward such behaviour with a place in the highest halls.Christianity is weird that way, one god who sacrifices himself for all men, ridding mankind in a sense of the ability to sacrifice on their own terms, to freely choose and thus own their divinity, though there remains the choice of the Virgin, the Son, and the Father, and Catholicism provides with an endless host of angels and saints and martyrs which can also be honoured and take the place that once some heathen density would have had in the heart of a lineage.
I wander.
This is because, there is no definitive proof of reincarnation - the notion of the Identity is lacking; what is it that survives, prevails? Some call it soul, others spirit, essence, but soul, spirit and essence are different things. What is it that survives?

[zinnat]

What we must consider is the impact that a knowledge of reincarnation would have on the world.

The knowledge of the past lives will have huge impacts. It will cheat the very purpose of the human life altogether. That is precisely why it is not allowed but like every other systems, some anomalies happen in some rare cases.

The battle of Kurukshetra, the message Vishnu gives Arjuna, is not that we must fight knowing the right causes, but that we fight the sake of expending ourselves in faith of a higher meaning we cant comprehend beforehand. I don't know if I say that quite right, the sentence kind of took its own turn.

The massage of Kurushetra is quite simple which is that one is supposed to do his/her best under the given circumstances, without caring for the result. That is Dharma(Duty).

This is because, there is no definitive proof of reincarnation

As i said in the last post, you can get proof only if look seriously and honestly for one, otherwise not.

By the way, as you said that you are a scientist, let me ask you a simple question regarding science.
As i understand, most of the scientists believe that this universe came into existence after a Big Bang. But, where is the proof of that? Can you or any other scientist can show me that empirically? I do not think that anyone can demonstrate that publicly. All this merely a theory, not an evidence. yet it is considered as a given. May i ask why, why the same liberty is not allowed for Metaphysical theories?

the notion of the Identity is lacking; what is it that survives, prevails? Some call it soul, others spirit, essence, but soul, spirit and essence are different things. What is it that survives?

I can answer that question, and of course, rightly. But again, i cannot provide any proof for my answer, especially on the internet.

with love,
sanjay

[Meno_]

Ill hazard.
The brain is perishable, the mind may not be.
The mind is sustained by memory.
The memory is archytipically layered.
Such layering of neural channels are driven and channeled by.
matrixes of overlooping energy could , -transformers
Identity is released/sustained by degrees.
The sustenance is the effect of a fearful release of memory channels.

The narrowing / widening of overlap determines the degree of recognizable identity.

The most basic forms of 'human-ness" has no tie in with the will to survive, and are embedded in eternal formal structural
Coherency.

This may be J. Khrishnamurti's reason for not forming specific explanation for reincarnation

[MagsJ]

For all practical purposes, it is beyond the imagination of mere mortals here on planet Earth to grasp just how staggeringly immense the universe is.

Is it?

"staggeringly immense" yes.
by itself a reason to live; to behold the staggering immensity. This is what I understand as the root of science. Who cares about eternal or non eternal life - ones place in the universe is solidified forever anyway, by the mere fact of observing the universe so keenly, an eternal imprint on eternity is made. This will never not have happened.

..it is not beyond some minds to grasp “just how staggeringly immense the universe is”.

[MagsJ]

For all practical purposes, it is beyond the imagination of mere mortals here on planet Earth to grasp just how staggeringly immense the universe is.

Is it?

To the best of my knowledge, yes. How about to the best of your knowledge?

No!

[Dan~]

As i said in the last post, you can get proof only if look seriously and honestly for one,

Records of children reciting a past life, which when researched, was all details of a real, recent life experience.

[Karpel Tunnel]

As i said in the last post, you can get proof only if look seriously and honestly for one,

Records of children reciting a past life, which when researched, was all details of a real, recent life experience.

well, no. no one has demonstrated that in rlation to many many cases

[iambiguous]

As i said in the last post, you can get proof only if look seriously and honestly for one,

Records of children reciting a past life, which when researched, was all details of a real, recent life experience.

Here's an account of it:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... past-lives

Now, here's the thing...

While I don't believe in reincarnation myself "here and now", I want to. Why? Because I want to believe anything other than what I do: that my own death may well be right around the corner and that it involves tumbling over into the abyss that is nothingness. Oblivion. "I" obliterated for all time to come.

So, to what extent have cases like this been examined by scientists, by skeptics?

Unfortunately, James Randi and his million dollar challenge -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Milli ... _Challenge -- was terminated in 2015.

Then there's this: http://archive.randi.org/site/index.php ... ation.html

Anyway, if there is any actual hard scientific evidence to support the existence of reincarnation [Buddhist or otherwise] provide the links.

Indeed, any substantiated evidence for the reality of life after death is welcomed by me.

[Meno_]

Brian Weiss, 'Many Masters and Many Lives is an interesting one

Edgar Casey, 'Reincarnation and Karma ' is a classic on the subject


.
Sri Aurobindo, 'Karma and Rebirth, would be intriguing if I would have time.

[zinnat]

Such evidences are not going to fall from the sky. Intersted people/researchers have to look for those.

Again, just as James randi announced a reward for the proof of such phenomenon, I would like to see similar announcement for the publically demonstrable proof of big bang from someone. I do not have that kind of money otherwise i would have done that.

Give the proof of the big bang in my backyard. Bullshit.

Thirdly, I am more than sure that a scientifically and publically demonstrabe the evidence of the theory that there is something more in humans( like soul/ consciousness) what science thinks is quite possible but that demonstration cannot be done on the stage. It rather needs a well eqipped scientific lab and scientists.

During last some years, after when I realised that all that can also be proved scientifically, I got in touch with many well established metaphysical institutions around the world and offered myself as a test subject but no one is interested. They are interested only in abserd things like remote viewing or spoon bending, which no one can do.

With love,
Sanjay

[Dan~]

The idea of forcing a soul into a reincarnation greatly disturbs me.
It is a lot like dieing because you loose your memories.
Forced to relive things again and again.

I had an encouraging dream about advanced souls and technology, recently.
I still have some hope in my existence.

[Meno_]

The idea of forcing a soul into a reincarnation greatly disturbs me.
It is a lot like dieing because you loose your memories.
Forced to relive things again and again.

I had an encouraging dream about advanced souls and technology, recently.
I still have some hope in my existence.

Dan,


We are not forced, plainly, what we see and experience here and now cant end, as it never really begins.

The vedic idea is , that learning to widen our seen and unseen perimeters, in and out of the ego's definition of who we are, makes sense, than the opposite.

Memories of who we think we are fade, but some of us try to hold on to it even in the overwhelming hope of our present existence.

Can You elaborate on Your dream a bit?

[Dan~]

Can You elaborate on Your dream a bit?

I barely remember any of it.
I remember a human shaped being that called itself a synthoid,
because it was made of synthetic components.
He was happy, wise, and peaceful.
He was existing in the other side,
like an afterlife type being.

I remember being basically lucid during the dream.
I wanted to learn as much as i could in my short time there.

[Fixed Cross]

What we must consider is the impact that a knowledge of reincarnation would have on the world.

The knowledge of the past lives will have huge impacts. It will cheat the very purpose of the human life altogether. That is precisely why it is not allowed but like every other systems, some anomalies happen in some rare cases.

Precisely.
Not to mention, knowledge of the suffering endured and the deaths undergone in previous lives would crush a personality.

The battle of Kurukshetra, the message Vishnu gives Arjuna, is not that we must fight knowing the right causes, but that we fight the sake of expending ourselves in faith of a higher meaning we cant comprehend beforehand. I don't know if I say that quite right, the sentence kind of took its own turn.

The massage of Kurushetra is quite simple which is that one is supposed to do his/her best under the given circumstances, without caring for the result. That is Dharma(Duty).

That amounts to the same as what I said.
"Outcome neutrality" and honour.
Much is to do of Arjuna's name. His name is given more importance by Krishna than his current life.

This is because, there is no definitive proof of reincarnation

As i said in the last post, you can get proof only if look seriously and honestly for one, otherwise not.

Who is denying this?

By the way, as you said that you are a scientist, let me ask you a simple question regarding science.
As i understand, most of the scientists believe that this universe came into existence after a Big Bang. But, where is the proof of that? Can you or any other scientist can show me that empirically? I do not think that anyone can demonstrate that publicly. All this merely a theory, not an evidence. yet it is considered as a given. May i ask why, why the same liberty is not allowed for Metaphysical theories?

I know from logical thinking that the Big Bang can not be the origin of being.
The venerable James S Saint once offered that the event we refer to as the BB is actually two or more colliding black holes.
It is certain that whatever it was, it isn't the beginning of time. There can not be a beginning of time.
What is can not not be, what is not can not be.

the notion of the Identity is lacking; what is it that survives, prevails? Some call it soul, others spirit, essence, but soul, spirit and essence are different things. What is it that survives?

I can answer that question, and of course, rightly. But again, i cannot provide any proof for my answer, especially on the internet.

Im not interested in proof, as analytic proof of soul is impossible. Analytic proof of being is impossible, proof of being is always synthetic.
Analytic arguments are ultimately derived from the synthesis of Being and a being.
I was more interested in your personal notion of what survives, of what is a soul.

[Fixed Cross]

The idea of forcing a soul into a reincarnation greatly disturbs me.

It is indeed not a very forgiving concept, not easy to come to terms with, for me either. I believe in it though. In part because of the reason I cited in the OP, in part because of reasons which are personal, experiential.

It is a lot like dieing because you loose your memories.
Forced to relive things again and again.

Well no because your karma is stored and your new natal chart is generated based on that karma. You will bear qualities you have cultivated in past lives.

I had an encouraging dream about advanced souls and technology, recently.
I still have some hope in my existence.

Is your hope in your own existence based on the future of our species? But we must recognize the value of life as we live it, perform our actions knowing they are all there is for us.